Re: [rtcweb] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-uberti-rtcweb-turn-rest-00.txt

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

On 8 July 2013 14:50, Adam Roach <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I only find one issue in my initial read through the document: why are we
> proposing the use of HTTP POST for stateless, idempotent information
> retrieval? The key benefit of this approach is that it doesn't actually
> create state in the network. That's a much better fit for GET.

That's an interesting question.  From one perspective, this is not
idempotent, nor is it safe.  It creates a new resource: a new
username/password pair with a defined validity.  You could even
identify this "resource" with a URI.  Imagine what a DELETE on that
resource would do...

But it's equally valid to try to pretend otherwise and use GET.  After
all, most servers won't actually be allocating any state for these
things.  And I can't think of an actual, practical use for DELETE, so
that's just a silly feature.

--Martin

p.s., I was going to let this slide, but this design is not RESTful,
no sense in pretending like it is.